İş Hukukunda Deliller – İzmir İş Hukuku Avukatı

Bir davanın tarafı olan herkes, kanunda belirtilen süre ve usule uygun olarak ispat hakkına sahiptir. Medeni Kanun’da da, kanunda aksine bir hüküm bulunmadıkça taraflardan her birinin hakkını dayandırdığı olguların varlığını ispatla yükümlü olduğu kuralına yer verilmiştir. İddianın ispatına yönelik Medeni Kanunda yer alan genel kurala paralel düzenlemeye Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanununda da yer verilmiştir. Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanununda ispat yükünün, kanunda özel bir düzenleme bulunmadıkça iddia edilen vakıaya bağlanan hukuki sonuçtan kendi lehine hak çıkaran tarafa ait olduğu düzenlenmiştir.
The burden of proof is... HMK's 190. Article 6 of the Turkish Civil Code, which is structured in parallel with Article 6 of the Turkish Civil Code, states that the burden of proof rests with the party who benefits from the legal consequences attached to the alleged fact. However, the article also notes that the contrary may be stipulated in special laws.
HMK Article 194. The article imposes the burden of concretizing the facts. The reasoning states that lawsuits cannot be filed and conducted with general statements without relying on concrete facts. For example, claiming severance pay, notice pay, vacation pay, overtime pay, etc., based on the statement that the plaintiff worked at the workplace for a long time and was not paid their legal rights, without specifying who terminated the employment and how, is not in accordance with the law. In such a case, the judge must clarify the case within the scope of Article 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
İş hukuku uyuşmazlıklarında taraflar iddialarını pek çok ispat aracı ile ortaya koymaya çalışırlar. Bunlardan sıklıklar karşımıza çıkanlar şöyle sıralanabilir: Sgk kayıtları, bilirkişi, tanık, yemin, ücret bordroları, fazla çalışmaya ilişkin imzalatılan evraklar, ibraname, iş sözleşmesi, Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanununa göre senet, kesin hüküm bulunmaması, ikrar ve yemin kesin delil sayılmaktadır. Tanık, bilirkişi, keşif ve uzman görüşü ise takdiri delillerdir. Mahkeme, çözümü hukuk dışında, özel veya teknik bilgiyi gerektiren hâllerde, bilirkişinin görüşünün alınmasına karar verir. Hakim, bilirkişi tarafından hazırlanmış olan rapora göre karar vermek zorunda değildir. Gerekçelerini ortaya koyarak farklı kararlar da verebilir.
In labor law, one of the most important means of proof is witness testimony. Besides written evidence, the witness is the person who best knows the workings of the workplace and is aware of all events through their senses. For this reason, witness testimony holds a special place in labor law. If the witness presented by the plaintiff has a conflict of interest with the defendant, that witness's testimony cannot be relied upon. In particular, the statements of a witness who does not work at the workplace, is unaware of the working conditions, is not familiar with workplace practices, and has no knowledge of the operation should not be taken as the basis for a decision. In such a case, the testimony of such a witness will not be considered credible, and if the plaintiff has no other evidence, the case will unfortunately be dismissed.
To give an example;
- The burden of proof regarding the employee's working hours, overtime hours, work on holidays, and the amount of wages received rests with the employee. However, the burden of proof that the employee's wages have been paid, that they have taken their paid leave, and that they have been paid for any overtime work performed, rests with the employer.
- The party claiming to have signed the resignation or release document under duress will have to prove it. In a lawsuit, the burden of proof rests with the employee who claims that their free will was compromised and that they were forced to sign the resignation documents, or that they signed these documents under mobbing and fear of losing their job. Otherwise, the case will be dismissed due to lack of proof, and the employee will suffer a loss of rights. A release document drawn up by a notary public is considered valid evidence until proven otherwise.
- In cases where the duration of employment is disputed in the specified manner, the employer's insurance records alone constitute irrefutable presumption that the employment was performed in that manner.
Görüleceği üzere iş davalarında iddiaları sadece dile getirmek yeterli değildir; doğru delillerle, doğru süreler içinde mahkemeye sunulması gerekir. İspat yükünün yanlış değerlendirilmesi, haklı olunan bir davada dahi usulen kayıplara yol açabilir. Bu nedenle dava öncesinde ve yargılama sürecinde uzman bir hukukçu ile yürümek hayati önem taşır.
Ephesus Law aspect, Izmir labor law attorney kadromuzla müvekkillerimize profesyonel destek sunmaktayız. İş mahkemelerindeki haklarınızı eksiksiz savunmak ve stratejik bir hukuki yol haritası çizmek için Karşıyaka lokasyonunda hizmet veren Izmir Karşıyaka lawyer ekibimizle dilediğiniz zaman iletişime geçebilirsiniz.
Other works we have prepared within the scope of Labor Law;
- Layoff Ban
- What is a Fixed-Term Employment Contract?
- Trial Period Work
- Penalty Clauses in Employment Contracts
- Resignation Letter
- Termination of Employment by the Employee for Just Cause
- Termination by the Employer for Just Cause (Article 25)
- Leaving work due to military service.
- My employment contract has been terminated. What should I do?
- What is a Reinstatement Lawsuit?
- Employee Absence from Work
- How long do employment lawsuits last?
- Evidence in Labor Law
- Release Agreement in Labor Law
- SGK Exit Codes
- Service Determination Lawsuit
- What is Collective Labor Law?
- Temporary Business Relationship
- Disciplinary Processes for Civil Servants
- What is a lockout?
- Employee Inventions
- SGK Exit Code
- What is a lawsuit notification?
Address: Nergis Neighborhood, Girne Boulevard No: 83, Floor 2, Apartment 2, Karşıyaka, İzmir
E-mail: info@efeshukuk.com
Phone: +90 534 415 52 56